Cases 31 - 40 of 289
Savage v. State of Oklahoma, The et al
as 4:2023cv00129
Plaintiff:
Marquice Donnell Savage
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, The, Alison Nutt, Lacy Lansdown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sandoval v. Tally et al
as 1:2023cv00701
Plaintiff:
William F Sandoval
Defendant:
Alison Tally, James Baily and Joe Morales
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ADAMS v. AROOSTOOK COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT et al
as 1:2023cv00108
Plaintiff:
HERBERT M ADAMS, IV
Defendant:
AROOSTOOK COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT, SHAWN GILLEN, GRAIG CLOSSEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sharp v. Towarnicki et al
as 7:2023cv00141
Plaintiff:
Gregory James Sharp
Defendant:
Leon Towarnicki, Chad Martin and Alison B. Linas
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Yo v. Alison Land
as 23-6227
Petitioner / Appellant:
YO
Respondent / Appellee:
ALISON LAND, Commissioner
Mwasi v. Broomfield et al
as 3:2023cv01072
Plaintiff:
King Mwasi
Defendant:
Warden Ron Broomfield, Ralph Diaz, CA Department of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Epley v. Luong
as 23-40038
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Charles E. Epley
Defendant / Appellee:
Hien Luong, D.D.S., Dorace L. Bedard, P.M.H.N.P., Wanda T. Hilliard, A.P.R.N. and others
Gu v. United States of America
as 2:2023cv00046
Petitioner:
Alison Gu
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Yo v. Land
as 3:2023cv00137
Petitioner:
Yo
Respondent:
Alison Land
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Walker v. Missouri State Public Defenders Office et al
as 4:2022cv00840
Plaintiff:
Lyndell Russell Walker and Lydell Russell Walker
Defendant:
Missouri State Public Defenders Office and Alison McCourt
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
